NCLB's sanction of reducing or not eliminating government funding for schools that fail to reach or meet a certain level of student achievement represents another futile process to close the disparity of yield. The Federal Title 1 program facilitates financial assistance and sponsorship for schools in non-English-speaking societies and in areas deemed low-income and technically disadvantaged in terms of educational resources. Limiting a school's financial resources through cutting off funding after “underachieving” performance results only worsens the challenge of closing the achievement gap between students from different socioeconomic backgrounds. Academics believe the ideal solution is to increase such funding rather than reduce it. Most potential defaulters under NCLB fall into low-income, non-English speaking, and technically disadvantaged societies in the United States, due to resource scarcity (Rueter pars 1-2; TAAD 1-8). The NCLB penalty of reducing or terminating funding for schools whose student achievement does not meet the intended goal therefore violates the logical solution to remedying the achievement imbalance, thus being futile in attempts to close the achievement gap. NCLB's rating system for determining eligibility for national funding creates an unsuitable environment for closing the performance gap. The system has a strong focus on assessment, based on preference for maths, science and English, and the need for high assessments to qualify for government funding. This encourages the school to focus more on the three subjects to the detriment of the others and promotes a negative atmosphere for student learning. Students demonstrate increased anxiety, thus narrowing the curriculum to...... middle of paper ...... e, Rod, and Gibbons, John. “No Child Left Behind: A Guide for Parents.” Department of Education, 2003. Web. November 26, 2011. Parrish, Thomas, et al. “Effects of the implementation of Proposal 227 on education students. K-12: American Institutes for Research and WestEd Second Year Report. Palo Alto. 2002. Network. November 28, 2011. Rueter, Ted. “Disastrous: No child abandonment law should be repealed, says Prof. Ted Rueter.” DePauw University. September 2007. Web. 30 Nov. 2011. 1st Grade Unified Teacher of Sacramento. Personal interview. December 1, 2011. “Ten Moral Concerns About Implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act.” (TMCI): National Council of Churches. Network. November 23, 2011. "Title 1 - Improving the Academic Performance of the Disadvantaged (TAAD)." U.S. Department of Education, 2006. Web. November 30, 2011. Juvenile Correctional Teacher. Personal interview. December 1st. 2011.